I want to find god, but not a god that can't deal with it's own creation. Faith should never require one to ignore reality. Faith should never require someone to dismiss questions, to deny what is.

That choice perhaps rests on my shoulders , and I do have a habit of taking it out on others. I hope I am learning a little bit at a time. If there is a god that can stand up to the details, I sure hope I am not a "sinner" in its eyes, cause I sure as hell am aware that I am a sinner in the eyes of every god man has concocted thus far. Man made gods are like that.

No problem the conventional god appears unconcerned and even cruel. And it appears as if there were two gods,with Satan being the other one, but pride got into his head and wanted to become as God , even if he was merely a fallen angel

there are many forms of gods, Seraphims, reflecting Msn' s inner nature.

But the question becomes one of connecting the Outer and the sinner God.

This is probably why mystics and hermits suffer for being inner directional, upon the outer directional's altar, the can not accept suffering, sacrifice, and demolition of the self, they broken these as too steep a price to pay for their faith.

IT IS A very difficult and painful toad to follow the calling of the Absolute.

I agree, unfortunately few live aware of even the notion. And likely 90% of those feel the hell in it, when it is actually of haven.

Oh lucky me!

And I am certain there are far more mundane topics we could debate.

For example. What is your flipping native language, cause half the time you sound like you are talking gibberish. I will draw you no quarter on sentimental accounts (ok, maybe I've drawn you a quarter of a quarter.) Don't you bother to proof language used against meaning intended or do you intend to obscure the meaning of what you write? And you didn't even bother sending me the secret super hero decoder ring in that box of Cracker Jack you sent.

Yeah Mowk, I am a kind of hybrid on languages, and they, for they are at times purposefully dissociated bm, I guess , as a challenge , to have some decode the intended meaning.

Sorry about missed promises not kept, and a lot of it You mustt forgive me for.

Literate. Illiterate, figurative can all be de- differentiated in use, and with You I have been harshly perhaps bland about those challenges .

Its always more difficult and maybe even confusing to be all that literally, in an age of abstract expressionism, and though I don't mimic styles like Ulysses, or Joyce , with You, o have given signals in accord , and You escape into the more concrete constructions of this other lyricist, who ventures into the realm of practical knowledge of a future rebirth.

I can see how someone can fear association with the abstract, obfuscating any reclusive attempt of getting to the bottom of it. In this day of age, bereft of magic and infinite possibility.

You are a modern man a realist, and the bad part shared almost certainlying retakes , as the twilight of relationships.

That I share that, is proof certain in my mind, that those boundaries are sacrascent, and this found through experience.(As between marital partners primarily.

Cops hate domestic violence because they almost always get placed into the fray of ire of the combatants, as when hen they make up.

For me it is a matter, noblisse oblige.of holding the fort. , notate how out of hand it gets, inscribed onto the abstract mind settings however strangely woven.

For me this is liberating, and Gertrude Stein, inaffibly yet mysteriously hidden within the bowels of unreason, finding , figuring some one. to excavate him from the more golden message of another far away place.

Found a delectable reference, totally unexpectedly , and began a quest to start Jung's Red Book. Maybe will find something there to share. Have You come across it?

It was never published for sale. but distributed privately to friends, only much later, after his death, that it became public domain.

Any way sorry for misjudging Your sensitivity, may be it is a mistake to presume, so, coming from a corsened life experience, which is really old hat, not at all stirring any feelings of bad repartee, to get back at some minor skirmish.

I could surprise by using four letter words, fuck that, its not here and now appropriate.

But I'm trying to develop more stylistic unity, but if it appears that I'm cut up, that's because being exposed to being cut up, in its beat up context. - the beat period : ( the beat-nick sense)

The most astounding piece of writing for that genre, Celine Long Journey Into Night, Ramboue, and Kerouac's Lonesome Traveler.

Last edited by Meno_ on Thu Dec 13, 2018 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

You have a quarter of a quarter, which, in this accounting, leaves you with some change due, plus you accrue interest on deposits made, so yeah you still have some slack left.

If you were able to articulate the feeling it would make the challenge of not misunderstanding more possible.

It is sort of an odd footnote. Do you have a bias that I am inclined to misunderstanding? I'd be inclined to agree with you but, that really doesn't shed much light on exactly what it is, I could misunderstand. If it makes sense to you perhaps you could share it from that perspective and I would be less inclined to misunderstanding.

It's feels like you are saying I should know it without ever defining it as a what that I should know. I am ok with a literal use of words as well, but they don't always capture meaning either.

My wife and I were at an outdoor bar in Costa Rica, twenty years ago. We were both smokers back then. The bartender spoke no English yet we could utter "dos cervezas por favor" and beyond that it didn't matter too much. Our spanish wasn't much more then uttering pre-learned phrases so there was a pretty big communication gap. We hadn't learned how to ask for an ashtray and didn't want to add our butts to the mess on the ground already. So we attempted to look up ashtray in our little pocket Spanish/English dictionary. It had no listing for ashtray. So we attempted to directly translate "tray for ashes". We ended up getting fairly smashed that afternoon which likely further hindered our attempts at communication and resorted to putting out cigarettes on the soles of our sandals and stashing the butts in our pockets to be properly disposed of later.

Point being "meaning" isn't always literally translatable. As I am not telepathic I have to sort of count on your capacity to be just a bit more succinct in your use of it. Thanks for giving it your all and trying.

Mowk wrote:MagsJ, a pleasant surprise, thanks you for gracing these digs. Sloths, they are an interesting choice. Someone I became quite fond of sparing with was fond of the expression "slow and steady wins the race" That does involve a sort of meekness. Not so much for winning but for the steadiness in process.

I guess I was being more self-depreciating than actually believing that.. sometimes we have no choice but to, due to circumstance throwing us into that option, until we get back into gear and stop coasting.

The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get that time back, and I may need it for something at some point in time. Wait! What?

Ok, seeing is not always believing.and a book can't be usually judged by its cover, however, in a different yet totally unexpected sense, they can. It is possible , or, in this age of approaching the elimination of most disarguable variables, the cover can express the most certain re-source, that mirrors within it's TITLE, the exact aim for which the substance of what the substance implies .

Mowk, I really know this argument may appear as confusing, so its only a proposed idea with and within which we may intend to explore.

Ill go further: For now I shall not redactbut offer a remedy, please stop with 'you can't judge a book by its cover' and then we can forge argument for now, giving me/you? some future intended source for reasoning.

in other words I don't intend to offer You more then You bargained for, yet retaining some idea of where I/we were coming from. After all, I'm not wasting any paper/trees here.

Seeing is often all it takes to believe, and sometimes it isn't enough. I judge books by their covers, and stories by their titles, as well. It isn't that you can't but perhaps you miss out on something if you do.

I can miss understanding you and yet that doesn't imply that I have arrived at a misunderstanding.

Bargaining for? Negotiating a deal, sort of bargaining? The universe doesn't often allow me to get away with doing that. I can either deal with it or bitch about it until it is dealt with. Assimilation in some flavor generally occurs; either me to it's relationship or it's over me. I never come out on top and I always do.

Ok, lets say I see the cover of a book. ' Being and Nothingness' , and am tortured by an evil genius to interpret the book by the cover title.

Now if I didn't know how Sartre connects with Descartes, I am forced to interpret the Cogito Ergo Sum to Being and Nothingness, in their most reduced manner, that is nominally.

Do knowledge and existence relatable in some way to Being and Nothingness on this level, even if using the most approximate translation to Greek? Of course they can, but how reliable so such become? One needs to read volumes before such relationships become truly understandable. Then the questions relating to how ideas develop can clarify differing meanings in that sense.

Could such an attempt be made without regard to the span of two thousand years, and what would such mean in terms of compatible understanding? Was it attempted by Plato or Aristotle or any of the other thinkers?

Now I would, without further ado answer in the positive, and this is exactly what Nietzsche waa trying to do. I admit I've only read him part and parcel, but I believe his intended method consisted of getting this across.

What your take is on meaning can only be unearthed if and only if, it is an intentional attempt to seek look beneath the cover, hiding a depth which can only reflect whomever is inquiring.

But then, some think the same of a summary, a forward , or an epilogue.

Many writers do not put them in the right order, without actually correlating them in order, to let each suppose , that a defiance of sequence will enable the other to travel through time, as of it was reversible.

And in a few cases they can, and bring faith to the idea of the immortality of a work, and the author.

Don't fear, this is not tantamount with bargaining or dealing with Faust, to restrain himself.

The whole reason for this demonstration can be spelled out from Sartre's 'self thought man' from his tremendous novel 'Nausea', and which I am only citing because of some criticism I received from a past ILP member St.James, who wondered my reductive style (.reversely) To my mind , immortal works will, of approached with total faith , reveal themselves whichever way.That is why between covers there lies substantial somethingness to cover the nothingness of an abyss, which will reveal much more then the mere reflection of whomever appears to look into IT.

And again, since words can so totally mirror an opposite effect, that this illustration tries to prove the transcendence of an idea of ever which way a narrative is constructed.

Last edited by Meno_ on Wed Dec 19, 2018 3:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

MagsJ. Coasting is painfully apt. I admit to the point of life seeming rather obtuse, as if none exists.

Maybe it is as simple as what is Is. No other point to it then life expressing life. I tend toward the thinking all experience can be reduced to a self/not self dichotomy. Life in any of it's flavors is simply a game of "I spy" between creator and created. A sort of get life, give life arrangement.

Meno_ you play your part remarkably, At times it is really quite difficult to distinguish on which side of the forward slash you fall. Bombs strike quite close to home but seem to come from so far away. Perhaps I have considered myself an observer for far too long and maybe that's all you ever get to be. How many other languages can you express yourself so compassionately in? The path you have tread seems worn into the walk around the block I have navigated once or twice.

If there is purpose to life, it isn't homo-sapiens concentric.

Last edited by Mowk on Thu Dec 20, 2018 7:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

Live, with life, in demonstration of being alive. "I am where you are". I hear it in the rush of waves in a conch shell, but I am uncertain if it can be heard, should be heard, through any other's shell. Are there really any more then just the two of us in the house?

Clearly you are not me, therefore you can only be part of the creator; any friend, any foe. It is that simple when I can manage to be that simple.

Can not begin to consider Your thoughts , at this time, only thanks for. their implications. I must have some time, to organise a less figurative reply. The continuum between cogito ergo sum and esse est percipii bears to my contextual and situational differences, and You may imagine how difficult that is in terms of autnonomity. In very general terms that is the underlying struggle within which I try to find some comic relief whenever they become available.At any rate , the existential suspense is remarkably sustainable at a not overly remarkable level, so as to afford some breathing space.

Meno_ wrote:Thanks , we are never truly alone, nor, never sure if someone else is there in a hug. Always there is a margin for error, as it should be , but not to exceed reasonable limits.

Christ will return , and we all share his body, though not necessarily his spirit.

When?.I really think the time is near but know one really knows the time of His coming.

I don't know Mowk, but I really think , that miracles are upon us and yet science has not waken up on this ad of yet.

To me the smiles of children are proof in this tremendous energy.

Spoken like someone who has a child. I haven't seen it from that perspective. But I won't deny the sentiment. The smiles of children...to you, yeast dividing to me. It is all a demonstration, whether that is proof? That is a question clouded, by waters that don't always run so clear. Seasons.

Miracles? There is wonder and awe but, I'm not thinking science isn't on a starboard tack, a right of wind track. Eventually if you are heading up wind you've got to adapt to a port tack. Left of wind, rinse, repeat. Sorry to resort to sailing metaphors but I like to sail. Same as what everyone likes but different.

Christ and His return... I'm not sure about any thing but I put money on being on the created side of the framework, and gender doesn't have a whole lot to do with it.